Warren Buffett and Bill Gates created The Giving Pledge

1 - Giving Pledgers promised to give their wealth away. As a group, they’re wealthier now than when they made the pledge.
2 - These high-end donors increasingly give to intermediaries rather than working charities.
3 - Some billionaires are blending their charitable giving with for-profit investment.
4 - High-end philanthropy is subsidized by regular taxpayers.

Mark Zuckerberg’s Foundation:
Following in the footsteps of eBay’s founder, Pierre Omidyar, CZI continues the tradition of “impact investing“,
which is essentially supporting nonprofit organizations in addition to selected for-profit entities…

They are dodging taxes by donating to their foundations and then using the money
to invest in the same things they would want to invest in if the money
wasn’t in a charity and they had to pay taxes on it. The whole thing is a scam!

Billionaire Philanthropy Is a Scam

The True Cost of Billionaire Philanthropy

Chuck Feeney did not get richer as he gave his money away.

If it was anonymous how do we know it was him?

There was a lawsuit against his company.

Why Were You Anonymous? Why Did You Go Public?

Warren Buffett and Bill Gates created The Giving Pledge, a legally binding agreement to give at least half of their wealth to philanthropy by death or through last will and testament.

It’s PR, tax dodging, and a scam. Actions speak louder than words.

Those “Giving Pledge” Billionaires Had Better Pick Up the Pace.
Most longtime US members are richer now than when they signed up.

my ire draws less from that, and more from how this sort of like, meaningless agreement over this particular example doesn’t really necessarily lend itself towards any more in depth analysis. We’ve put the marker too high, the standard too high. A billion dollars is obviously very extreme, you can see that with the comparisons from a million to a billion. What about a million, though? Is that bad, is that a bad standard of evil, if you have a million dollars, does that make you evil? Where’s the cutoff, here?

You got way too focused on the bottom text of the meme while ignoring the top text.

It is very clear - As long as extreme poverty exists then people with extreme excess wealth are not good people.
If the world had no homeless, workers were paid fairly and not exploited, people didn’t die from lack of medical coverage or affordability,
and billionaires didn’t poison our planet in search of record quarterly profits, then we might be able to have super rich people who are also good.

So, you no longer need to ponder about an arbitrary dollar amount.

The only good billionaire is one who actively becomes a millionaire by choice.
Here’s the only example I know of:

Charles “Chuck” Feeney, who co-founded retailer Duty Free Shoppers, became a billionaire and donated much of his fortune anonymously.
Over his lifetime, Feeney made more than $8 billion in grants in a handful of countries, supporting education, health, equity and more.
Former Billionaire Chuck Feeney, Philanthropist Who Pioneered Giving While Living

You live on a farm and one day a stray dog shows up. It looks like this: starving dog pic

You decide not to feed it because it’s not your dog - it’s not your problem.
But your whole house is completely stocked with food. You throw out large amounts
of table scraps and leftovers daily.

How many people would consider that to be evil?

It’s not about the behavior and character of one billionaire over another.
It’s the DOING NOTHING while HOARDING MONEY that is the issue.

No one can argue that $50 million isn’t enough to live a fabulous life.
Yet, many want to argue that 1,000 million (1 billion) or more is fine
as long as that person worked hard and didn’t step on people to get it.

A billionaire is simply not a good person even if he or she does nothing.

If anyone should be allowed to live a life of luxury, it’s the surviving members of the fucking Beatles…

Any person could live a life of luxury with 50 million or 10 million. They don’t need 1,000 million or more.

As stated in another part of this thread, why the fuck does one person need 6 yachts?

The problem not really being understood is excess wealth. Human brains have difficulty fully grasping large numbers.
It’s like trying to understand the size of the universe.

Every one of the billionaires could live amazing lives with 95% less than what they have.

He owns 6 yachts! What a waste of money, resources, and imagination!

You can only be on and enjoy a yacht one at a time so the other 5 are just there while other human beings in the world suffer.

“I used to see a large box by the railroad, six feet long by three wide, in which the laborers locked up their tools at night, and it suggested to me that every man who was hard pushed might get such a one for a dollar, and, having bored a few auger holes in it, to admit the air at least, get into it when it rained and at night, and hook down the lid, and so have freedom in his love, and in his soul be free. This did not appear the worst, nor by any means a despicable alternative. You could sit up as late as you pleased, and, whenever you got up, go abroad without any landlord or house-lord dogging you for rent. Many a man is harassed to death to pay the rent of a larger and more luxurious box who would not have frozen to death in such a box as this.” - Henry David Thoreau, Walden